Skip to main content

Summary of Rothschild Power


I repudiate an objection to Jews based on birth rather than their culture pathology. However, in spite of my objection to race hatred, and my desire that solutions not invoking this be worked out, I am obligated to not engage in obfuscation, and so I present the uncensored facts as I have come to understand them, so as to work towards nullifying the harsh political realities that most prefer to ignore:
The book highlighted is by a deeply problematic author and bigoted disciple of Ezra Pound - the depth of his problems is revealed in his FBI file:[]=FOIA:%20Mullins
Nevertheless he did some very good work and he can be independently corroborated - and in the text highlighted he provides a very important gestalt perspective, for which reason I have highlighted it. Also, many like to pretend that arguments like his were merely the invention of himself and others in the fringe populist anti-Semitic milieu, when much of the information he provides can be independently verified - the political scientist Peter Dale Scott, while acknowledging his problematic nature, nevertheless noted the value of Mullins, stating, "I know from my own experience that there are relevant facts in ... Mullins which it is impossible to find elsewhere.": - and also, eminent experts have corroborated these arguments:
I will eventually relegate mention of Mullins to a footnote, though I provide his text in lieu of an intended long essay, the nucleus of which is provided here:
The following, which corroborates these arguments and shows how they are a natural extension of what can be established with primary and authoritative sources, is a placeholder for that intended long essay, abridged from a previous version:

The Rothschild family has ruled the world for a very long time. Of course, the Rothschilds didn’t just come out of nowhere. Their activities would have not been possible in a World in which there was not a long history of financial domination. Some have traced this history of what I’ll call mercantile parasitism to old Venetian financial networks (incidentally, the Warburg banking family, influential in our time, descended from the Venetian del Banco family). Some, like R. Buckminister Fuller (in "Critical Path"), have traced this system back to ancient Phoenecian predecessors to these merchant bankers. It has probably been around for as long as “civilization”, as we presently call it, has existed. This empire of mercantile parasitism spread from Venice and elsewhere outward through Europe, and further refined banking practices in Amsterdam. Things really took off with the “Glorious” revolution, financed by Jewish bankers from Amsterdam like Manasseh ben Israel (Cecil Roth. "A History Of The Jews In England". Chapter VII. "Readmission, 1609-64":,1609-64.htm), and the establishment of the bank of England, also put forth by Jewish bankers from Amsterdam (Werner Sombart. "The Jews and Modern Capitalism". T.F.Unwin, 1913. p. 70: - Sombart dispels the idea that Jews were "forced" into usurious trades by European monarchs on p. 309 of his text). Years later, in the 1700s, as noted by the Jewish scholar Josef Kastein, "The stock exchanges of both Amsterdam and London were controlled by Jews." (Josef Kastein. "History and Destiny of the Jews". Garden City publishig Company, Incorporated, 1936. p. 377:
The activist of the early 1800s, William Cobbett (, noted, as printed in "A history of the Protestant reformation in England and Ireland" (1829), of the Bank of England (p. 428): "The inventors knew well what they were about. Their design was to mortgage, by degrees, the whole of the country, all of the lands, all of the houses, and all other property, and even all labour, to those who would lend their money to the State.":
Stephen Zarlenga noted that "Substantial opposition to the Bank arose immediately. Some came from coin clippers such as the goldsmiths, who wanted no competition from the Bank. The Tories, England's landowners, opposed it as they saw the power it would give to their commercial political opponents - the Whigs. Others opposed it for sound economic, or moral reasons.
The Lower House of Parliament objected that this would be a bank in the State without being under the control of the Government.
One of the monetary thinkers of the time, William Lowndes, arguing against the Bank, said:
"...who can think that posterity will be willing to pay a tax of £110,000 per annum (on the original loan) not for the support of their own government, for the time being, but to go into the pockets of private men, strangers as well as natives for money advanced to their ancestors, when it will be in their power to acquit the public of such a burden?,.. "Future Parliaments will always have power, and may be told it is in their interest to exonerate the Nation of such endless burden as this will otherwise be." [cf. Bannister, Saxe. "William Paterson, the Merchant Statesman, and Founder of the Bank of England: His Life and Trials". W. P. Nimmo, 1858. p. 73:]
Lowndes didn't realize that through constant warfare vast amounts of new debt would be piled onto the original, making it impossible to pay in gold and silver." (Zarlenga, Stephen. "The Lost Science of Money". American Monetary Institute. Valatie, NY, 2002. p. 283)
The 1908 Encyclopedia Americana stated the following about the Bank of England:
“Its weakness is the weakness inherent in a system which has developed with the smallest amount of legislative control … its capital is held privately, and its management is not in any way directly or indirectly controlled by the state. On the other hand, during its whole history, it has been more or less under the protection of the state; its development has been marked by successive loans of its capital to the state in return for the confirmation or extension of its privileges, and it still continues to exercise powers and owe responsibilities delegated by the state … The bank of England is controlled by a governor, deputy-governor and a court of 24 directors who are elected by the proprietors on the nomination of the directors …” (
The economist David Ricardo attacked the Bank of England as follows,"They have the power, without any control whatever of increasing or reducing the circulation in any degree they may think proper: a power which should neither be entrusted to the State itself, nor to any body in it... When I contemplate the evil consequences which might ensue from a sudden and great contraction of the circulation as well as from a great addition to it, I cannot but deprecate the facility with which the state has armed the Banks with so formidable a prerogative.":
In 1960 the Radcliffe Committee examined the functions of the Bank of England. Vol. 1, Memoranda of Evidence (from the committee investigation), stated (p. 9. 4.: – “Because an entry in the books of a bank has come to be generally acceptable in place of cash it is possible for banks to create the equivalent of cash [i.e. - credit]. Thus a bank may pay for a security purchased from a customer merely by making an entry in its books to the credit of that customers account; or it may make an advance by means of a similar entry. In either case an increase in it’s deposits will occur.”
The Report of the Royal Commission on Monetary, Banking, and Credit Systems, published in 1956, stated (
“The process called “creation of credit” or “creation of money” is no new development. Its origin in England in the seventeenth century as a development of the activities of the goldsmiths is described in the following passage from The Theory of Credit by Macleod (first published in 1891), Vol. II, Part II, at page 520.”
(That text just describes the history of fractional reserve banking, and is available here for the interested reader:
Incidentally, in "Elements of Banking" (Longmans, Green, And Co., 39 Paternoster Row, London, New York and Bombay, 1902), Macleod noted (p. 155) "When it is said that a great London Joint Stock Bank has perhaps ₤25,000,000 of deposits, it is almost universally believed that it has 25 millions of actual money to "lend out" as it is called. ... it is a complete and entire delusion. These ... "deposits" are not deposits in cash at all: they are nothing but an enormous superstructure of credit.":
The 1931 Report of the Macmillan Committee said: "It is not unnatural to think of the deposits of a bank as being created by the public through the deposit of cash representing either savings or amounts which are not, for the time being, required to meet expenditure. But the bulk of the deposits arise out of the action of the banks themselves, for, by granting loans, allowing money to be drawn on an overdraft or purchasing securities, a bank creates a credit on its books, which is the equivalent of a deposit." (see bottom):
The New Zealand report also noted that following about this system that developed from fractional reserve banking in England:
“The fact that a large proportion of our money supply comes into existence as a result of the operations of the trading banks obviously disturbed many witnesses who appeared before us.” (
All of this created a formidable foundation for the Rothschild World system we have been dominated by for the last 200 years. (Some of the above sources were cited in "The Struggle for World Power" by George Knuppfer and verified with google books. Facsimiles will be forthcoming. I express confidence that they are cited in full context, because other corroborating sources that I have seen the full text of tell a similar story, and because the most astonishing citations in Knuppfer's text are independently verifiable:
The Rothschilds had extreme power almost as soon as they were established as a dynasty. The founder of the dynasty made his money by financing William of Hanau, the Elector of Hesse, who made much of his fortune by loaning mercenaries, most famously to Britain to put down the American Revolution, and who was described by Rothschild biographer Frederic Morton as “Europe’s most blue and cold blooded loan shark.”
The Jewish Encyclopedia article on the Rothschilds tells us that with the rise of Napoleon, William of Hanau was forced to flee to Denmark, and tells us how he entrusted the Rothschilds with a great sum of money, which they subsequently embezzled. It states: “After the battle of Jena in 1806 the Land-grave of Hesse-Cassel fled to Denmark, where he had already deposited much of his wealth through the agency of Mayer Amschel Rothschild, leaving in the hands of the latter specie and works of art of the value of £600,000. According to legend, these were hidden away in wine-casks, and, escaping the search of Napoleon’s soldiers when they entered Frankfort, were restored intact in the same casks in 1814, when the elector returned to his electorate (see Marbot, “Memoirs,” 1891, i. 310-311). The facts are somewhat less romantic, and more businesslike. Roths-child, so far from being in danger, was on such good terms with Napoleon’s nominee, Prince Dalberg, that he had been made in 1810 a member of the Electoral College of Darmstadt. The elector’s money had been sent to Nathan in London, who in 1808 utilized it to purchase £800,000 worth of gold from the East India Company, knowing that it would be needed for Wellington’s Peninsular campaign. He made no less than four profits on this: (1) on the sale of Wellington’s paper, (2) on the sale of the gold to Wellington, (3) on its repurchase, and (4) on forwarding it to Portugal. This was the beginning of the great fortunes of the house, and its early transactions may be divided into three stages, in each of which Nathan was the guiding spirit: namely, (1) from 1808 to 1815, mainly the transmission of bullion from England to the Continent for the use of the British armies and for subventions to the allies; (2) from 1816 to 1818, “bearing” operations on the stock exchange on the loans needed for the reconstruction of Europe after Napoleon’s downfall; and (3) from 1818 to 1848, the undertaking of loans and of refunding operations, which were henceforth to be the chief enterprises of the house.”:
In discussing the Denmark incident, Morton noted that “someone once said the wealth of Rothschild consists of the bankruptcy of nations.”
The Rothschilds had established a network all over Europe, with Nathan Rothschild financing the British and James Rothschild financing the French. (See “The Rothschilds” by Morton, p. 43.) So the same family was financing both sides of this war!
The Rothschild apologist Niall Ferguson denied that the Rothschilds scored another financial coup d’etat when, with advance intelligence, they started dumping securities as the battle of Waterloo was ending, creating the expectation that they knew Napoleon had won, when, in reality, they knew that Napoleon had lost, and they thus monopolized Britain’s market in consols, which formed the basis of British debt. When we look into the origins of Ferguson's argument, we find that it is spurious: (Ferguson also presents the Rothschilds as a force for peace, yet the following sources show them to also be a force for war - peace or war was a matter of their convenience and personal preference)
And in reality, the historian Ignatius Balla had established that this had indeed occurred in a book that was almost suppressed (, but was proven accurate in a court case ( It was also discussed by Rothschild biographer Frederic Morton on p. 49 of his biography of the family. The financier Henry Clews noted in “The Wall Street Point of View”, Vol. III, p. 253, “The Consolidated Act in 1757 … by which the debts of the nation, including annuities, were consolidated or brought together into one scheme, and average rate of interest being struck at three per cent. [T]hese “consols”, … are kept in account in the Bank of England and virtually form the great bulwark of its deposits.” (,+which+were+kept+in+an+account+at+the+Bank+of+England+and+is+the+great+bulwark+of+its+deposits.%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=NForT9_eDcXZiALnuoikCg&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22The%20Consolidated%20Act%20of%201757%20consolidated%20the%20debts%20of%20the%20nation%20of%20England%20at%203%25%2C%20which%20were%20kept%20in%20an%20account%20at%20the%20Bank%20of%20England%20and%20is%20the%20great%20bulwark%20of%20its%20deposits.%22&f=false) As monopolizers of British Bank of England consols, the Rothschilds won control of the Bank of England, henceforth they ruled England, and collected interest on the debts they were owed, which of course exceeded the amount of money in the society in the first place, since money was/is created as a debt to the nation via book entry!
Morton noted that “We cannot guess the number of hopes and savings wiped out by this engineered panic. We cannot estimate how many liveried servants, how many Watteaus and Rembrandts, how many thoroughbreds in his descendants’ stables, the man by the pillar won that single day.”
Now, the Rothschilds have a vast empire of unaccounted for wealth gained through exploitation. The Queen has immense power also – enough that her private wealth remains unaudited ( She is perhaps the most powerful landowner on the planet. Yet she is still subservient to City of London (Rothschild) interests. The City of London, or “Crown”, is very much like the Vatican in Rome – it has it’s own powers which extend beyond that of Britain. Insight into the power of this place, and the financial imperialism that surrounded it, is provided in E.C. Knuth’s masterwork “Empire of “The City”" ( Insight into the relationship between the Queen and the City is provided in the text “London” by Aubrey Menen. The person who manages the City on behalf of the bankers is referred to as the Lord Mayor. Menen notes that whenever the Queen wants to visit the City, she must bow and ask his permission, and that (p. 16) “the Lord Mayor in his robes and chain, and his entourage in medieval costume, outshines the royal party, which can dress up no further than service uniforms.” (,+and+his+entourage+in+medieval+costume,+outshines+the+royal+party,+which+can+dress+up+no+further+than+service+uniforms.&dq=the+Lord+Mayor+in+his+robes+and+chain,+and+his+entourage+in+medieval+costume,+outshines+the+royal+party,+which+can+dress+up+no+further+than+service+uniforms.&hl=en&sa=X&ei=qiktT6viC7TZiAKcq8jGCg&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAA)
Andrew Carnegie, the famous industrialist who was connected to these circles, also discussed how much more powerful City of London financiers were than the monarchy in his text “Triumphant Democracy” (p. 380) – “My American readers may not be aware of the fact that, while in Britain an act of Parliament is necessary before works for a supply of water or a mile of railway can be constructed, six or seven men can plunge the nation into war, or, what is perhaps equally disastrous, commit it to entangling alliances without consulting Parliament at all. This is the most pernicious, palpable effect flowing from the monarchial theory, for these men do this in ‘the king’s Name,’ who is in theory still a real monarch, although in reality only a convenient puppet, to be used by the cabinet at pleasure to suit their own needs.” (,+while+in+Britain+an+act+of+Parliament+is+necessary+before+works+for+a+supply+of+water+or+a+mile+of+railway+can+be+constructed,+six+or+seven+men+can+plunge+the+nation+into+war,+or,+what+is%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=VSotT-mDAbCGiQKq_omxCg&ved=0CD4Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=%22My%20American%20readers%20may%20not%20be%20aware%20of%20the%20fact%20that%2C%20while%20in%20Britain%20an%20act%20of%20Parliament%20is%20necessary%20before%20works%20for%20a%20supply%20of%20water%20or%20a%20mile%20of%20railway%20can%20be%20constructed%2C%20six%20or%20seven%20men%20can%20plunge%20the%20nation%20into%20war%2C%20or%2C%20what%20is%22&f=false)
Vincent Cartwright Vickers, who was a Deputy Lieutenant of the City of London, director of Vickers, Ltd., and director of the London Assurance, noted the power of those he served, in his book "Economic Tribulation" – “… financiers in reality took upon themselves, perhaps not the responsibility, but certainly the power, of controlling the markets of the world and therefore the numerous relationships between one nation and another, involving international friendships or mistrusts […] Loans to foreign countries are organized and arranged by the City of London with no thought whatsoever of the nation’s welfare but solely in order to increase indebtedness, upon which the City thrives and grows rich … This national and mainly international dictatorship of money, which plays off one country against another and which, through ownership of a large portion of the Press, converts the advertisement of its own private opinion into a semblance of general public opinion, cannot for much longer be permitted to render Democratic Government a mere nickname. Today, we see through a glass darkly ; for there is so much which ‘it would not be in the public interest to divulge’…” (electronic edition of book here:, cf. Knuth, “Empire of “The City”", p. 65)
From the base of the City of London, the Rothschilds wielded extreme power. To give just one example of this - they set the price of gold every day. William James, In "Twilight Over England", published on behalf of the Imperial War college of London, noted that (p. 78) "The story of the gold-fixing has often been told. How every weekday at 11 a.m. the representatives of five firms of bullion brokers and one firm of refiners meet at the office of Messrs. Rothschild (except on Saturday) and there fix the sterling price of gold. There is, however, a great deal of activity which lies behind his final act -- this centralization of the demand for, and the supply of gold in one office and the fixing of the price of gold on that basis. A price of gold is first suggested, probably by the representative of Messrs. Rothschild, who also acts for the Bank of England and the Exchange Equalization Account.":
And of relevance is the document called "Trading Emissions: Full Global Potential" (London: The Social Market Foundation, January 2008: - written by Simon Linnett, Executive Vice Chairman of N M Rothschild, London (see "about the author" section of that document).
In the document, he defined "greenhouse emissions" as the new form of "social market" and stated:
"That such a market has to be established on a world basis coordinated by an international institution with a constitution to match....
That, perhaps, it might be regarded as having wider benefits than merely `saving the planet' - perhaps it might be the basis of a new world order, one that is not based on trade and/or conflict resolution.
Perhaps one can see a way to achieve this goal through leadership, vision and some marginal and manageable renunciation of national sovereignty, how the world might just get there.
The repercussions of addressing climate change may extend well beyond that single but critical issue....
Implicit in all the above is that nations have to be prepared to subordinate, to a certain extent, some element of their sovereignty to this world initiative."
He noted that "The political costs of such loss of sovereignty are lengthy. Loss of competitiveness (massively overstated in the activities in which energy is used - especially since trade will be more difficult, if, at the margin, transport is made more costly), loss of power and loss of direct control over economic levers are potentially the most significant and give the most cause for concern. But these actions are necessary if we are to answer the accusation that "it doesn't matter what we do when China is expanding its energy usage at its current rate" - we have to bring China and India in and they are not going to enter a scheme where they do not have a "say". When countries are already foregoing the right of direct control over monetary policy through the creation of independent central banks, this [the above] could be a relatively small price to pay for such inclusion."
He furthermore stated that "The EU member states have recognised their need to subordinate sovereignty to the EU; in time, if this is to work, the EU itself will need to yield sovereignty to a bigger world body on carbon trading."
He stated "Above all, this plan requires "sponsors" - a country prepared to host it and a senior politician prepared to lead this new initiative. If such a route map could be found, then perhaps we might be at the beginning of a new world constitution and a new world order."
He stated that regulating this should be a "World Environment Authority" operating from a "world city with world skills and world facilities." He then notes, in a section entitled "A natural role for London", "London is a world financial centre (possibly "the" world financial centre)." and that "London would make a compelling case to house the World Environmental Agency."
The Rothschilds also financially assaulted France. They were not considered by the French nobility to be worthy of the megalomaniacal pre-eminence they had established elsewhere, so to punish the French aristocracy, the Rothschilds bought French government bonds from the Ouvrard and Baring brothers bankers, and dumped them in huge quantities in the European market, creating a panic! They then achieved pre-eminence in French society that was to their liking.
Incidentally, in both England and France, a Rothschild was the only merchant banker allowed to be a director of the Central Bank:, and the Rothschilds would act as direct subsidizers in times of crisis:
The Niles’ National Register published in 1828 stated:
“… the house of Rothschild certainly stands pre-eminent at the recent death of one, who was thought the richest banker in Europe”:
The Niles’ National Register published on Sept 19, 1835, stated:
“The ROTHSCHILDS are the wonders of modern banking … we see the descendants of Judah, after a persecution of two thousand years, peering above kings, rising higher than emperors, and holding a whole continent in the hollow of their hands. The Rothschild govern a Christian world. Not a cabinet moves without their advice. They stretch their hand, with equal ease, from Petersburgh to Vienna, from Vienna to Paris, from Paris to London, from London to Washington. Baron Rothschild, the head of the house, is the true king of Judah, the prince of the captivity, the Messiah so long looked for by this extraordinary people. He holds the keys of peace or war, blessing or cursing.”:
Hugh S. Legaré, a Congressman from South Carolina, stated on Friday October 13, 1837 in Congress:
“What does the house of Rothschild owe to the Governments of Europe—that house to which all the Governments on the continent are obliged to have recourse in their financial exigencies?”:
The Bankers Magazine printed in 1847 stated:
“The five brothers (Anselm, Solomon, Nathan, Charles & James) have taken part in most of the great financial affairs of Austria, of France, of England, and of almost every country. They have formed among themselves an invincible phalanx. By themselves, or by their agents, they have excercised a great control over the principal places in Europe, and, faithful to their habit, never to undertake anything separately and to concert all their operations, they have followed one unvaried and identical system. Their power was such, that at one time they were free to make either peace or war.” (
Robert Merry’s Museum, Volume 15-16, printed in 1851 stated:
“The Richest Family in the World: The following account of the Rothschild’s will be found interesting, as showing what may be done by industry and talent.” (
The Ladies’ Repository published in 1863 stated:
“Baron Lionel Rothschild, the first Jew ever admitted into the English Parliament, and the wealthiest man, it is believed, now residing on our planet.” (
The Banker's Magazine published in New York, said to bankers in 1855:
"No nation can now wage a prolonged war without the aid of the great Jewish bankers of Europe." [!!!!! - see here for a saved image of this extraordinary document:]
The Cyclopaedia of Commercial & Business Anecdotes printed in 1865 stated:
“The Rothschilds, Wealthiest Bankers in the World.
The House of Rothschild is the impersonation of that money power which governs the world.” (
Rhodes Bradford (born 1849) enlisted in the 34th Pennsylvanian Volunteers during the American Civil War, he moved to New York in 1872 and became a journalist. In 1877 he started Rhodes' Journal of Banking, later buying and incorporating older banking journals. He was elected to the New York Assembly, was Chairman of Commerce on Banks and Banking, was unanimously nominated to for Congress, but declined the honor. And was the founder and president of the 34th Street National Bank, New York between 1900 - 1910.:
In his journal, it was noted:
"It must be admitted that the Jewish people control the financial markets of Europe, possessing a much greater influence than in this country. The Emperor of Russia found that he could not place a loan in the Continental markets, because Rothschild did not view such a loan as favorable to the interests of England. A few Jewish bankers are therefore really the arbitrators of peace and war in Europe." [see saved image of document:]
Former president Franklin Delano Roosevelt said “The real truth of the matter is that a financial element in the large centers has owned the Government since the days of Andrew Jackson” (Letter to Col. Edward Mandell House (21 November 1933); as quoted in F.D.R.: His Personal Letters, 1928-1945, edited by Elliott Roosevelt (New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce, 1950), p. 373):
Printed in 1905, Jewish Literature & Other Essays stated:
“The palaces of the Rothschilds, the richest family in the world, harbor many a warm heart, whose pulsations are quickened by the thought of Israel’s history and poetic heritage. Wealth has not abated a jot of their enthusiasm and loyal love for the faith.” (
The aforementioned Jewish Encyclopedia article on the Rothschilds noted (
“It is a somewhat curious sequel to the attempt to set up a Catholic competitor to the Roths-childs that at the present time the latter are the guardians of the papal treasure.”
The British economist J.A. Hobson’s seminal book “Imperialism” published in 1902, in a section entitled “Economic Parasites of Imperialism”, states (
“Does any one seriously suppose that a great war could be undertaken by any European State, or a great State loan subscribed, if the house of Rothschild and its connections set their face against it?”
The Missionary Review of the World printed in 1906 stated that the Rothschilds were estimated to control $30,000,000,000 by that time:
Adjusted for inflation, this number becomes $726,274,509,804 (in today's dollars:
This does not include other profits accrued since then. Or money accrued from interest bearing accounts. With compounding interest, one can only guess at how much money the have. They have never been audited. A reasonable assumption would be a lot more than a trillion dollars.
Prof. Werner Sombart noted, in "The Jews and Modern Capitalism", p. 99: "'There is only one power in Europe,' was a dictum well-known about the middle of the 19th century, 'and that is Rothschild.'":
Kent Cooper served as general manager of the Associated Press from 1925 to 1943, and then became it's executive director. In "Barriers Down", pp. 6-9, he noted that by the beginning of the 20th century, the news agencies Reuters, Wolff, and Havas were a triumvirate that together monopolized international news. On p. 21, he noted that in his circles, the account was that international bankers, led by the Rothschilds, assumed ownership of those agencies at the beginning of the 20th Century. Relevant excerpts are here:
Thus we know why they were subsequently seldom mentioned in the world's media, since they owned the media.
The 1912 Encyclopedia Americana noted that “The political events of 1813 raised the House of Rothschild to the important position it has SINCE occupied in the commercial and financial world”:
It stated further, in the 1919 edition, volume 23, that “much intermarriage among cousins indicates the family is destined long to retain control of European finance”:
Rothschild biographer Frederic Morton noted that, “[T]hough they control scores of industrial, commercial, mining and tourist corporations, not one bears the name Rothschild. Being privately held partnerships, the family houses never need to, and never do, publish a single public balance sheet or any other report of their financial condition.”
Baron Philippe de Rothschild described his family as "the richest and most powerful family in the world."(De Rothschild, Philippe, Littlewood, Joan. The Very Candid Autobiography of Baron Phillippe De Rothschild. NY; Ballantine Books. 1984. p.283): - see also this for a partial image of that page:
Recently the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds consolidated forces (though the Rockefellers have been vassals of the Rothschild empire from their inception - see "The World Order: A Study in the Hegemony of Parasitism", by Eustace Mullins, ch. 4, "The Business of America"):
And Arnaud de Borchgrave, editor in chief of the Washington times, admitted that the House of Rothschild is the subsidizer of the cultural engineer and financial terrorist George Soros, who launches "color revolutions" [see work of F. William Engdahl for information on color revolutions - for the problems ofSoros, see:, and] against countries that resist the international system [the Washington Times removed the story from their site. The story did originally state, however: "The Gnomes of Zurich were derogatory caricatures of secretive, greedy, stiff Swiss-German bankers, pince-nez aquiver, who ruled over the land of secret numbered accounts for tax dodgers the world over. With the world’s best financial intelligence service, they knew their stuff and seldom spoke, even in retirement.
Their Geneva counterparts in French-speaking Switzerland were more sophisticated, relaxed in the company of global wheeler-dealers, and weren’t afraid to speak their minds, albeit off the record. Such was George C. Karlweis, the brain behind Banque Privee, owned by the late Baron Edmond de Rothschild. His biggest claim to fame: George Soros and the launch of his Quantum Fund in 1969."]:
To illustrate the power of the Rothschilds in the current World Market, note the text of the following Financial Times article discussing the sale of Evelyn Rothschild’s stake in Rothschild Continuation Holdings:
“..[this] requires agreement on the valuation of privately held assets whose value has never been tested in a public market. Most of these assets are held in a complex network of tax-efficient structures around the world.” (“French Rothschild is set to take helm in London”, Charles Pretzlik, Banking Editor, The Financial Times, London, February 10, 2003) - cited here: - I will acquire the primary source shortly.
Quite different from the experience of most of us with our assets, isn’t it?
In May 2011, a Swiss banker, who would not be named for fear of the consequences, was interviewed by the Russian magazine NoviDen. He revealed the mentality of these people, what they like to do in their spare time:
"[T]hese people are corrupt, sick in their minds, so sick they are full of vices and those vices are kept under wraps on their orders. Some of them like Strauss-Kahn rape women, others are sado maso, or paedophile and many are into Satanism. When you go in some banks you see these satanistic symbols, like in the Rothschild Bank in Zurich. These people are controlled by black-mail because of the weaknesses they have. They have to follow orders or they will be exposed, they will be destroyed or even killed."
He also noted, regarding the powerful policy steering group known as the Bilderberg group: "You have the inner circle who are into Satanism and then there are the naive or less informed people. Some people even think they are doing something good, the outer circle."
It is interesting that you can see Satanic symbols permeating the clothing of the members of the Rothschild family (as with the necklace of Baroness Philippine Mathilde Camille de Rothschild):
A Pravda interview with Tatyana Koryagina, who worked with the Russian Ministry of Economic development, and who knew of economic disasters that were set to plague the U.S. in 2001, went as follows:, preserved here:
“Koryagina: There are international “super-state” and “super-government” groups. In accordance with tradition, the mystical and religious components play extremely important roles in human history. One must take into account the shadow economy, shadow politics and the religious component, while predicting the development of the present financial situation.
Pravda: Still, I don’t understand what could be done to this giant country [the U.S.], whose budget is calculated in the trillions of dollars.
Koryagina: It is possible to do anything to the U.S… whose total debt has reached $26 trillion. Generally, the Western economy is at the boiling point now. Shadow financial activities of $300 trillion are hanging over the planet. At any moment, they could fall on any stock exchange and cause panic and crash. The recent crisis in Southeast Asia, which touched Russia, was a rehearsal.”
On their website, the Rothschilds note that they are de facto, an agency separate from governments, that acts in an "advisory" capacity, writing, "We are widely regarded as the adviser who best understands the needs of governments and the benefits of a discreet, long-term relationship.":
But as we can see from the above citations, their influence is much deeper and more pernicious than those seemingly innocuous words imply.
(Special credit is due to an internet correspondent who goes by the pseudonym "The Black Rabbit of Inle", who is a brilliant researcher. Some of the above citations came from him, and I combined that with my own research. He operates the following website:

Language English
Collection opensource


Reviewer: blissentia - - March 11, 2015
Subject: qualifiers
As regards the critic below - I noted problems with Eustace Mullins. That doesn't stop the fact that authoritative sources corroborate some of what he said - and that facts exist independently of some of the problems of the messengers. The other reviewer on "Jesuits" provides speculation, but no evidence.

Regarding Jonathan Price's statement, he needs to get over Hitler, and look at the devotion not only to positive Eugenics and National revival of Nazis (which was fine), but also the extreme devotion to negative Eugenics, of Adolf Hitler (much different and much more objectionable than positive Eugenics -particularly as it was forced), his extreme anti-Slavic sentiment, and genuinely anti-Semitic sentiment - as regards the former, Allen Chase wrote,
"When Hitler’s Thousand-Year Reich fell in 1945, it was revealed by the German Central Association of Sterilized Persons that at least two million human beings had had been ruled in the Eugenics Courts to be eugenically unfit (dysgenic) and sterilized against their will during the twelve years of the Nazi version of [Harry H.] Laughlin’s Eugenical Sterilization Law. Under the voluntary sterilization law of the Weimar Republic overthrown by Hitler, between 1927 and 1933 a total of less than 500 Germans—about 85 people a year, most of them women whose health would have been jeopardized by pregnancy—had been voluntarily sterilized. Under the Nazis, an average of 165,000 Germans of both sexes were sterilized annually against their will—at the rate of 450 forced sterilizations per day." (The Legacy of Malthus : The Social Costs of the New Scientific Racism (University of Illinois Press, 1980). p. 135):

And see excerpts from his "Table Talk" for the latter: - see also "Mein Kampf", p. 420ff:

there are some contradictions in this with other statements, policies, etc., as outlined in relevant primary sources, but from the excerpts given, we can clearly see brutal racism. There are problems with the standard narrative on Hitler as shown by pp. 170-183, 208-212, 220-231, 236-241, 246, 250-251, 259-261, 266-272, and 284-286 of Irving's rebuttal to the negative court decision against him:

Nevertheless, even if we modify our views on Hitlerism based on that appeal, we still have ample evidence of Nazi extremism and brutality.

The problem is that people can't wrap their mind around the idea that the Nazis could have been half-right and half-quite wrong. The problem with many mainstream academics about acknowledging the "half-right" part is that if they did this, they would be biting the hand that fed them.

People should realize that individuals still lauded in the Universities were far more abhorrent than Hitler ever was - e.g. - in early Bolshevik Russia, the difference of opinion among "leadership" seemed to be over whether 10 million Native Russians should be "annihilated" (Zinoviev) vs. 90 million (Lenin) - relevant citations are on the main post on my main site. Also, to note just one important item that should get people thinking - on February 29, 1944, a letter from the British Ministry of Information to the BBC and British Clergy noted that the Communists had committed atrocities all over Europe, but to save face, they would fabricate atrocity propaganda to vilify the Germans ( Subsequently, they would do just that, regurgitating propaganda against Germany that had appeared in other contexts, as false accusations, for years prior to WWII. The Zionist leader Nahum Goldmann admitted what a farce the whole affair was when he said in his autobiography that the whole Nuremberg trail had been prepared YEARS in advance in order to secure Palestine for the Zionists:

The reason the negative side of Hitler is exaggerated and the others are lauded is because, as Henry Kissinger noted, "What we in America call terrorists are really groups of people that reject the international system.": - in this vein, I suggest reading "Red Symphony" - an alleged interrogation of the Trotskyite leader Christian Rakovsky that is unvalidated, but is nevertheless a must-read as it helps us understand essential THEMES that can be independently corroborated:

Regarding the recent reviewer - if I attempt further work in this, it will be mostly from primary and archival sources. Many of the most important links already given are to primary sources.
Reviewer: manhattansunrise - - December 29, 2014
Subject: very controversial
There are many controversial links here.
Reviewer: smacdon2012 - - December 3, 2014
Subject: Um, Eustace Mullins
Um, apparently some pathetic antisemites have posted this book by Eustace Mullins under a completely different entry as an homage to their hero. Please take this down, or at leadt ask these neo-nazi boyscouts to post the book under the correct entry. Pathetic. Once again Jonathan Price the idiot who gives five stars to any racist shit is on board.
Reviewer: pachcc - - December 3, 2014
Excellent compilation. Rothschild name and the entire world system have only one aim and this is the missing part of the puzzle history must put together:
" Throughout Christendom, Protestantism was menaced by formidable foes. The first triumphs of the Reformation past, Rome summoned new forces, hoping to accomplish its destruction. At this time the order of the Jesuits was created, the most cruel, unscrupulous, and powerful of all the champions of popery. Cut off from earthly ties and human interests, dead to the claims of natural affection, reason and conscience wholly silenced, they knew no rule, no tie, but that of their order, and no duty but to extend its power. (See Appendix.) The gospel of Christ had enabled its adherents to meet danger and endure suffering, undismayed by cold, hunger, toil, and poverty, to uphold the banner of truth in face of the rack, the dungeon, and the stake. To combat these forces, Jesuitism inspired its followers with a fanaticism that enabled them to endure like dangers, and to oppose to the power of truth all the weapons of deception. There was no crime too great for them to commit, no deception too base for them to practice, no disguise too difficult for them to assume. Vowed to perpetual poverty and humility, it was their studied aim to secure wealth and power, to be devoted to the overthrow of Protestantism, and the re-establishment of the papal supremacy" Great Controversy - Ellen White, 1888 pag 234.2
Reviewer: Jonathan Price - - April 30, 2014
Subject: The Root of All Evil
"I rebuke those who express a racial, rather than ideological, objection to Jewish politics."

Adolph Hitler would agree with you. Jews are not "hated" or disliked because of who they are but because of WHAT THEY DO. That is a FACT. Those that hate Jews simply because of who they are genetically I'd venture to say simply do not exist. Semitism (i.e., Jewish behavior) produces anti-Semitism. That's a FACT and contrary to ADL's false propaganda regarding this matter.
Download Options
In Collection
Community Texts
Uploaded by
on 6/4/2012
Community Texts
by Dennis Stillings
Community Texts
Community Texts
Community Texts
Community Texts
by EJD
Community Texts
Community Texts
by Theodore Kauffman
Community Texts